In-breedingcomes back to bite

LIKE the look of that cute puppy you saw on the internet or the fluffy kitty in the pet-store window?

Canberra City News; Eleri Harris, 16 September 2010

Would-be pet owners beware, the RSPCA ACT warns the Territory is rife with backyard breeders selling animals beset with problems caused by in-breeding.

This is why in the next sitting week of the ACT Legislative Assembly, Labor backbencher Mary Porter says she will table a discussion paper on a mandatory code of practice for the breeding and sale of companion animals. “There are people breeding dogs who have no experience or understanding about what they’re doing in backyards across the Territory,” RSPCA ACT CEO Michael Linke said.

“Some dogs have heads too small so they have seizures. “We had a pug in today, bred in Canberra, it’s been inbred so much we have to remove an eye and give it surgery so it can breathe properly. “We’re seeing a different issue every week.”

The ACT has a voluntary code of practice that was introduced in 1992 along with the Animal Welfare Act, but pre-internet and unenforceable.

“The voluntary code of practice isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on,” Linke said.”There is no enforcement action.

“A mandatory code and enforceable and supported animal welfare legislation is needed.” Porter says the ACT needs to take leadership on this issue to encourage nationwide regulation of breeders.

Her discussion paper will suggest  registration for breeders, increased pull factors to desex and vaccinate animals and more comprehensive licensing.

“You often have voluntary codes, but unfortunately they’re not strong enough to require people to actually adhere to them, that is why we’re looking at a mandatory code,” Porter said.

“A lot of our sales now of domestic animals are on the internet. It’s a lot more difficult in many ways, it’s harder to control sales, how that purchase is made and where that purchase is from.

“You don’t know where that animal was bred and the conditions in which it was bred, whether or not it has any behaviours or issues the person should be aware of.

“There’s a lot involved in looking after an animal and having an animal as part of your household. I think the way we treat animals says a lot about us as humankind.”

Porter is starting with a discussion paper because she wants the community to get involved in developing the code.

“We’ve had advice from the council. we’ve had advice from the industry itself, the pet industry, and we’ve had advice from the RSPCA. I think that what we’re putting up is not untested in that regard, but it does need to be released and tested more broadly.

“I’m happy for expert bodies to comment on it, but I’m also wanting the public to comment on it. In the end they’re the people who are going to rock up to the pet shop or go on the internet and purchase an animal.” Porter says she is working with NSW MP Steve Whan to make sure the code is developed with consideration to cross-border issues.

“We need to be cognisant of what is happening in our neighbouring States, Victoria as well as NSW,” she says. Liberal MLA Alistair Coe is unconvinced the Territory needs a mandatory code of conduct.

“We certainly do acknowledge there is an issue that needs to be addressed, but we’re not convinced at this stage that a mandatory code of conduct is necessary,” Coe says.

“We will look at the discussion pa- per with interest, but at this stage it’s too early to commit to any position.” The Greens’ Caroline Le Couteur says her party is supportive of the code, but all animals need better protection, not just companion animals.

“I’ve got really high hopes for this process, as the issues are real and quite distressing,” Le Couteur said, “A mandatory code is the right way to go and should include clear rules around intensive puppy breeding, pet shop activities and regulating puppy sales. We also very much want to see the underfunding of the pound and RSPCA addressed.

To access original article, click here..



Filed under ACT, Breeders, Desexing, Pet shops, Puppy Mills, RSPCA ACT

3 responses to “In-breedingcomes back to bite

  1. Jan Baker

    A mandatory code is the way to go but it has to be enforced & make these people understand that they will not get away with mistreating these dogs or any other animals …..the conditions that these puppy farms are trading is absolutely disgraceful….the RSPCA should have more say & more authority in the inspection of these puppy farms…let them be able to close them down permanently, not just take away the animals that have been mistreated as these people will just start with more dogs……shut them down & don’t allow them to run a business or own dogs ever again….the law is too lenient on these people it has to come down harder & show them they are not going to get away with the inhumane way in which these animals are treated…..I will support any law that does this…..

  2. CFA Needs Be Held “Legally Liable” For Their CFA Breeders That Commit Crimes Against Pedigreed Cats

    CFA is a cat registry, the largest cat registry in the world, has employees, makes a profit, is a legal corporation and promotes cat breeding worldwide. In promoting cat breeding that creates agony & suffering for the pedigreed cats under the ultimate care of their owners, the CFA cat breeders.

    There is no doubt about it registered cat breeders have terrible reputations worldwide. The horror stories hit the major cities, nationally and even worldwide. The horror stories of pedigree cat abuse, neglect, cruelty, hoarding & rescuers is beyond belief & comprehension. It truly makes the good cat breeders who are doing the right thing look terribly bad and tarnish all cat breeders as bad. The crimes are done by the very caretakers who is suppose to love and care for them the HERE

    The government is really under alot of pressure due to the amount of cruelty done against all animals in general, especially with the new crush videos that are being exposed. And the governement may just make CFA and all cat & dog registeries “legally liable” for their own breeders crimes against their cats/dogs..

    Cat Fanciers Ass., Inc [CFA] needs to place their money where their mouths is. “If” CFA is against pedigree cat abuse then do something to show the public & your sponsors you are serious about your CFA cat breeder commiting horrific crimes against pedigreed cats. Because if you do not the government will hopfully make you “legally liable” for the crimes.

    As it stand right now CFA is getting away with murder. How? When one of their paid registered cat breeders commit a crime against their own cats, CFA places their name on a meaningless list and wrings their hands and says, “that breeder is banned from CFA privileged services”. That is too easy for you CFA. You need to stand up to the plate and come up with very serious consequences for your CFA breeders harming our pedigree cats that God made. God made these cats to love not to harm like so many of your breeders have done. Perhaps the time has arrived where CFA needs to re-examine their procedures & consider legally protecting themselves against their own CFA registered breeders commiting crimes against cats.

    To read more inside information about Cat Fanciers Association. Inc [CFA] to here:
    CFA Index 1
    CFA Index 2

  3. the pet store here in our area offers me a great deal of discount when i buy from them ..”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s